Two measures would increase Oregon prison population, but at a price

Ross William Hamilton / The OregonianInmate Michael Horsley gives a haircut to fellow prisoner Juan Guzman-Rodriguez inside the Oregon State Penitentiary in Salem. Voter approval of two November ballot measures that would send first-time burglars, identity thieves and drug dealers to prison would require the state to pay for more prisons and more prison workers.

Vanessa Clausen says she was a functioning substance abuser, raising three children, holding a steady job and making monthly mortgage payments. But after a divorce, she fell in with a meth crowd and was busted by police in 2000 with a box full of stolen identification cards.

"I never was arrested until I was 38 years old," Clausen says. "My daughter was a Rose Festival princess."

The arrest didn't change her behavior, and a second conviction for identity theft put her in Coffee Creek Correctional Facility for more than two years.

There will be a lot more inmates like 46-year-old Clausen if Oregon voters approve either of two November ballot measures that would increase penalties for identity theft, burglary, drug dealing and other nonviolent crimes.

Measures 57 and 61 would cost the state plenty: from $411 million to $797 million in operations over the next five years and $314 million to $1.3 billion in prison construction debt.

The measures go before voters even as the FBI reported this week that property crime in Oregon fell 20 percent over the past two years -- the second-largest drop in the nation.

Oregon's prison population has increased more than 80 percent since voters in 1994 approved Measure 11, which set mandatory prison sentences for violent crimes. Oregon's incarceration rate ranks near the middle among states.

Prison ballot measures

• Measure 57: Increases sentences for repeat offenders. Includes drug treatment. Estimated to add 1,670 inmates. Estimated to cost $411 million over five years and require the state to borrow $314 million for prison construction.

• Measure 61: Sets mandatory minimum sentences for burglary, identification theft and dealing drugs. Estimated to add 4,106 to 6,389 inmates. Estimated to cost $522 million to $797 million over the first five years and require the state to borrow $1.1 billion to $1.3 billion.

The prison spending would come in the midst of recent grim economic news, from growing unemployment to a plummeting stock market. Because the state relies on personal income taxes to pay for schools and services, the ailing economy will reduce the tax dollars the state has to spend.

Paul Warner, legislative revenue officer, says state revenues are expected to rise 8 percent in 2009-11, but that could drop. Even 8 percent growth could force the Legislature to dip into the state rainy day fund because that's not enough tax revenue to cover inflation and the full cost of new programs in the current biennium, Warner says.

"We'd either have to cut spending or raise revenues," he says.

Senate President Peter Courtney has no idea how the Legislature would pay for either measure.

"One's expensive, and one is very, very, very expensive," says the Salem Democrat. "I've got to worry about education. I've got to worry about human resources. I've got to worry about the rest of public safety. This isn't going to make things any easier."

Measure 61 has the bigger price tag. Sponsored by Kevin Mannix, a former Republican legislator, the measure would set mandatory minimum sentences for first-time identity thieves, burglars and drug dealers.

Earlier this year, the Legislature decided to give voters a less expensive option: Measure 57, which targets repeat offenders and provides drug treatment.

Mannix says the state's cost estimates on Measure 61 are too high.

He says prison officials need to come up with less expensive alternatives, such as work camps, to house inmates convicted of nonviolent offenses.

"I see absolutely no creativity," he says. "Instead, they went down to the cellar and found a bottle of wine that had turned to vinegar."

Others question the number of new inmates either measure would send to prison.

Gary Meabe, a Multnomah County deputy district attorney who supervises property crime cases, said estimating the costs of the measures was impossible.

The method used to estimate the impact of Measure 11 was faulty and resulted in greatly exaggerated cost projections. This time around, state officials tried to take into account the impact of plea negotiations, but they incorrectly assumed that prosecutors would treat nonviolent offenders the same as violent ones, Meabe said.

"They didn't have a way of accurately predicting costs, and yet they had to come up with something," he said. "So they were left with this method that is just not reliable."

Craig Prins, executive director of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission, disagrees and says a five-person committee made the cost estimates after holding public hearings with lots of input. Prins said his staff of economists did adjust for the difference between nonviolent and violent crimes and ultimately based the estimates on the real-life impact of Measure 11.

"I wanted to use real data, objective data," Prins says.

Treatment lacking

Clausen's fate might have been different if Measure 57 or Measure 61 was in effect when she was first arrested.

Mannix measures get funding boost

• Loren Parks, the biggest political contributor in Oregon history, donated another $500,000 this week to Kevin Mannix's campaign for two crime-related measures.

She received probation, but no access to drug treatment, and continued to abuse substances.

Under Measure 57, most first-time offenders would receive probation. But if fully funded by the Legislature, first-time offenders also will have access to treatment.

Measure 61 would have sent Clausen to prison for 36 months unless she agreed to plead guilty to another charge.

Clausen stopped short of endorsing either measure, but she says access to drug treatment might have helped her avoid the second conviction that sent her to prison.

"Maybe that would have pulled me out of the mess I was in," she says.

Women make up less than 8 percent of Oregon's 13,625 prison inmates. Measures 57 and 61 would increase the percentage of women in prison because they target crimes that women are more likely to commit. The biggest impact would be in identity theft cases, where women made up 44 percent of the convictions.

Under Measure 61, Oregon would end up with the highest percentage of female prisoners in the nation, according to an analysis by The Oregonian. The state currently ranks 28th.

In response to the measures, corrections officials prepared three budgets that include expanding prisons, building two new ones and renting beds. The plans include building a second women's prison and turning a Salem men's prison into an all-women facility.

About a quarter of the new inmates are expected to be women -- 20 percent under Measure 57 and 33 percent under Measure 61. And they cost more than men because of health issues.

About 21 percent of all inmates require some level of intensive mental health care. For women, the number is 50 percent, according to Jennifer Black, a spokeswoman for the Oregon Department of Corrections.

How to manage -- and pay for -- an influx of inmates is in dispute.

Mannix says nonviolent offenders could be housed in work camps where they could plant trees in government forests and clean up state parks.

"They're perfect candidates for rebuilding our communities," he says.

But Max Williams, director of the Corrections Department, says inmates with mental health and behavioral problems don't qualify for work crews.

And in any case, work crews are not cheap because of the higher staffing-to-inmate ratios that are required.

"It's a lot more complicated than you think," Williams says. "I can honestly say that doing that wouldn't save you any money."

Extra burden for state

Two years ago, Clausen gave birth to a girl. When Clausen went to prison earlier this year, her sister agreed to take care of the child.

But a lot of women in the criminal justice system don't have family members who are willing or able to step in. So more female inmates serving longer sentences are going to increase the burden on state social services.

Mannix acknowledges that imprisoning more women could leave more children in the hands of the state. But he says the threat of losing their children might serve as a deterrent.

"One of the best incentives for moms to clean up acts is to turn away from a life of crime," he says.

For her part, Clausen doesn't see the value in locking people up like her.

"Most of the people in here are like me," she says. "They are not dangerous criminals."